When Will A.I. Replace Doctors?

Even as big companies race to build up their AI capabilities, the prospect of using A.I. technologies in healthcare raises more questions than answers, xconomy writes.

Here are four key issues voiced by healthcare and technology experts in recent interviews with Xconomy:

—Will doctors, hospital administrators, and patients trust A.I. technologies? If the creators of a seemingly “black box” machine-learning system have trouble explaining how it makes decisions, will FDA regulators approve it?

—Will the tools slot in seamlessly to caregivers’ existing routines, or will the new technologies require a change in their work flows?

—What will the payment model look like for these technologies, particularly if they play a direct role in diagnosis and treatment?

—Will doctors and other caregivers lose jobs to A.I.? And if so, when?

On that last point, companies like IBM Watson Health and GE Healthcare insist that the A.I. technologies they’re developing are meant to assist caregivers, not replace them.

But investors and technologists interviewed by Xconomy say the automation threat is real, at least in some areas of healthcare. The most common idea seems to be that any job that involves a lot of image analysis—think radiology and dermatology—might see some threats in the coming years. That’s because advances in computer vision, pattern recognition, deep learning, and related technologies lend themselves well to such work.

It’s still early, but there have been studies showing medical image recognition software can be nearly as accurate as human experts. For example, a Stanford University study published in January in the journal Nature useddeep neural networks to diagnose skin cancer from medical images. The software’s performance was on par with 21 dermatologists, the study’s authors wrote.

The person “who sits in a dark room reading images all day—that’s not a job I want to sign up for coming out of medical school,” says Michael Greeley, a partner with Boston-based healthcare technology investment firm Flare Capital Partners.

But software might not eliminate imaging-related doctor jobs entirely, Greeley says. The technology will likely reduce the number of images that are difficult to assess with certainty, but there will probably still be some that need a human eye. Those will go to the “grizzled radiologist” on staff, who has seen thousands of slides throughout his or her career, to make the final call. “The specialist will continue to have a role, but it will just be a more narrow role,” Greeley says.

Isaac Kohane, a doctor and the chair of Harvard Medical School’s department of biomedical informatics, predicts that A.I. will start having a tangible effect on medical imaging within three years. Pathologists and radiologists should start thinking about how they can adapt. “It’d be foolish not to think on how can I leverage that so I’m not put out of business,” he says.

Other potential applications of A.I. in healthcare are more “focal,” Kohane says, and maybe only cover 5 to 10 percent of a doctor’s daily routine. He cites examples like using software to determine if a patient’s heart failure is getting worse (and why), and suggesting which pairs of drugs are likely to cause side effects.

The possibility of implementing a “general-purpose A.I.” in healthcare is at least a decade away, Kohane estimates. He’s referring to a conversational software program that would assess symptoms reported by patients and deliver a “full diagnosis and treatment plan like a competent and well-educated primary care doctor.” Human doctors probably aren’t “sweating” the idea, he adds, at least for now.

Indeed, Alex Harding, a medical doctor conducting his residency at Massachusetts General Hospital, thinks A.I. in healthcare is “overhyped and not being used to a significant extent currently.”

“But I am a believer that artificial intelligence will become an important element in healthcare in the future,” says Harding, whose focus is primary care. “It’s years away, but I think that it’s something we’re going to have to become ready for and going to have to be thinking about.”

It sounds like he’s bracing for the possibility—not necessarily embracing it. In response to that suggestion, Harding says he’s unsure and wants to see how A.I. technologies get implemented in hospitals and clinics.

“I think it’s important not to take the human element out of healthcare,” he says.

He gives a real-life example of a patient with a chronic disease, who refuses to come into the hospital to have her laboratory tests checked. “I think for her it’s fear of having bad news,” Harding says. “No computer in the world is going to convince her to go in.” It takes a doctor to understand her and help make her comfortable enough to come in for her checkups, he says.

“Most of what we do in healthcare is not about making a diagnosis,” Harding says. “It’s about working with patients, who are humans, to find an appropriate treatment. That requires a human relationship … that develops over time and can’t be replaced by a computer.”

When Will A.I. Replace Doctors? - overview

Summary: Even as big companies race to build up their artificial intelligence capabilities, the prospect of using A.I. technologies in healthcare raises more questions than answers.

Consider the life of a chef on the road. Even when they’re not doing “research” for an upcoming project—trips that are essentially designed for overeating and drinking—they’re still likely seeking the best of what got them into the industry in the first place: damn good food.

The proliferation of low-cost airlines flying out of the U.S. means that it’s now possible to hop to Europe for as low as half the price charged by major carriers, the New York Times writes. But there’s always a trade-off — and it pays to comparison-shop, according to the publication.

Featured Contributors

Chasing snake oil and fad gurus is harmless until your journey of personal discovery becomes a platform for prescribing therapies to complete strangers. Any reasonably diligent venture capital partner should be weighing the risks.

Shkreli — who famously insulted members of Congress earlier this year but refused to testify officially over his own decision to increase the price of a life-saving pill — is now hopping at the chance to defend generic drug manufacturer Mylan.
He may even have opened the door to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, where he previously cited his Fifth Amendment's right to avoid incriminating himself.
"Any chance i can come through this time and actually testify?" he tweeted Thursday in a post directed at the committee's Democrats.
All of this now paves an unlikely new friendship between Shkreli and Mylan CEO Heather Bresch.
Heather Bresch created about $15 billion in value for Mylan in the seven years since she stepped up as president of the company. A big part of that value add came from her talent for repackaging off-the-shelf drugs into bona fide blockbusters.

Donald Trump is talking about Hillary Clinton’s health, as are two doctors who havenever evaluated Clinton. They have apparently diagnosed her with all kinds of ailments using the long disproven Fox-Drudge equation.
This attention on Clinton has renewed some interest in the letter Donald Trump released last year from his personal physician.

Even as doctors enter a medical field with more paying patients under the Affordable Care Act and unprecedented numbers of job opportunities, 25 percent of “newly trained physicians” would still choose another field if they could, according to a new analysis.